Tuesday, November 28, 2017

GOLRIZ GHAHRAMAN

The cant and hubris surrounding new Green MP Golriz Ghahraman and her claims about her work helping to bring to justice those charged with crimes in the Ruandan genocide when the reality is that she was helping to defend Joseph Nzirorera, National-Secretary of the Mouvement républicain national pour la démocratie et le développement (MRND) and also President of the Ruandan  Assemblée nationale in the Interim Government of 8 April 1994, against charges of genocide, complicity in genocide, complicity to commit genocide, direct and public incitement to genocide, rape and exterminations, murder and causing violence to health #1, have been well canvassed in a number of blogs including Kiwiblog, Whaleoil and Homepaddock.  

With her credibility shot a number of commentators have wondered if she can remain a Green MP.

The answer is of course YES.   From a Green's perspective this is fake news of the Donald Trump variety.   Dirty politics from the 'right' ... ignoring the fact that well known 'leftie' Phil Quin is one of her main accusers.    She will stay ... credibility doesn't figure big in the Green's lexicon.

#1  Source is 'The Hague Justice Portal'.



23 comments:

Paulus said...

Whatever does it matter in that she is guilty of omission - it does matter that she is a typical Green Unelected MP within our stupid system.
Cinderella needs every vote so she will have nothing to do with anything the media may draw up.
Ghahraman's gold plated whatever, she has a vote for the left wing.

Gerald said...

Aint pollies wonderful?
Earlier it was someone with claimed links to Chinese intelligence and now one who served as an intern on the defence side of a genocide trial.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Golriz Ghoneburger Ghahraman

A leaner version of Material Turei, she appears to have learned her trade from Medalsome Mark and CV Cunliffe.

Paulus, I think you might be wrong. My understanding is that if she resigned the next dil on the Greens list would take her place.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Gerald

Get it right. The Chinese fellow did not claim links to Chinese Intelligence. It was you and all the other lefties who made those claims.

The Veteran said...

It has to be bad for Ghahraman when the hard leftist 'The Daily Blog' dumps on her.

But will she 'go' and will pigs fly and will Winston Peters pull the plug on Labour ... silly question.

Noel said...

I love the proposed disclaimer for all future politicans.
Kinda puts it all into perspective.
https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/28-11-2017/on-golriz-ghahraman-human-rights-and-defending-the-devil/

Psycho Milt said...

I guess it's a problem for a human rights lawyer in Parliament that the right not only doesn't understand human rights but despises the people who do. Fortunately, the right isn't her target market.

Psycho Milt said...

Oh, and yes, very much a return to Dirty Politics as described by Hager in his book of the same name.

pdm said...

So Milt are you saying that Labour stalwart Phil Quinn is leading the Dirty Politics charge on this?

Psycho Milt said...

The less said about Phil Quin the better. The fact that the news media constantly parade some right-winger as a "Labour stalwart" so they can claim to have had some balance in their pontificating counts for shit. The guy was a leftover from the right-wing takeover of Labour in the 1980s and is about as left-wing as General Pinochet. And no, not "leading the Dirty Politics" charge, just one of the useful idiots distributing Slater and Farrar's sewage byproducts.

Johno said...

So the truth == sewage? Righto...

David said...

OK, so an aspiring lawyer does what aspiring lawyers do and argues a case. How does that make the aspiring lawyer complicit in any crime(s) committed by the person s/he is defending?

Perhaps you haven't heard of href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenceslas_Munyeshyaka">Wenceslas Munyeshyaka. He is also responsible for crimes in Rwanda, and has been convicted, but the Catholic Church is quite happy for him to remain a Priest, albeit no longer in Rwanda. I submit that he is a far worse person that an aspiring lawyer.

You may find the genocide in Rwanda as repugnant as I, but there is still a need for justice to be seen to be done and that is only done by having a competent defence.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

As usual, David tries to shift the goal posts.

The laddy's crime, in case you missed it David, is not defending the bad bastards but trying to make her CV look as though she actually prosecuted them.

Straight out of Ron Mark and David Cunliffe play books.

David said...

OK Adolf, what was the crime she has committed and are you laying a complaint with the Police? Launching a private prosecution? Nah, you're just going to bloviate.

The Veteran said...

David/Milt ... Adolf has it exactly right. Nothing to do with defending the bad bastards. That's what lawyers to. It's making out that she was defending the good bastards that's the problem.

I can understand completely your embarrassment in trying to defend the indefensible.

Heh Milt ... re Phil Quin ... your "the less said about him the better". Pray tell why? He's one of yours.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

David

Did you get up this morning and tell your cornkflakes that you were going to be a dickhead ALL DAY?

Psycho Milt said...

The laddy's crime, in case you missed it David, is not defending the bad bastards but trying to make her CV look as though she actually prosecuted them.

People don't "miss" things that didn't happen. That's because they didn't happen. The Dirty Politics team claims that Ghahraman was trying to make her CV look like she prosecuted the Rwandan accused war criminals, which she apparently did by telling journalists interviewing her how she served on the defence. It's utterly moronic, but if there's a willing market of partisans eager to lap it up, why not put it out there?

Psycho Milt said...

I can understand completely your embarrassment in trying to defend the indefensible.

Er, hello? You're participating in a dirty politics attack on a human rights lawyer. If anyone should be embarrassed, it's you for posting this.

David said...

Come on Adolf, spell out the crime you claim has been committed.

I doubt that Phil Quinn is one of Milt's anything. He is an ex member of Labour, his opinion carries as much weight as anyone's, except he is coming from a place of darkness.

The major problem the right have with her is not anything she did, did not do, how she represented herself, but because she is everything the Reich hate - intelligent, successful, refugee.

Then there is this tidbit that makes her even more of an enemy of the Authoritarian Reich - Ghahraman appeared before the Supreme Court of New Zealand in a case which ultimately led to the police overhauling their rules about undercover operations.

Adolf Fiinkensein said...

Well done David. You DID answer my question.

Those poor bloody cornflakes.

Seigneur Bacon et Oeuf said...

"Paulus said...
Whatever does it matter in that she is guilty of omission - it does matter that she is a typical Green Unelected MP"

Just another who doesn't understand how the electoral system works. How do these idiots function in society?

Anonymous said...

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1711/S00326/implied-criticism-of-defence-lawyers-unacceptable.htm

Anonymous said...

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/99390271/phil-quin-apologises-for-calling-green-mp-golriz-ghahraman-a-genocide-denier